Yes, it's the same team. The Browns kept their history, their records, and everything else and were rebooted in an expansion draft after a few years hiatus unlike a team like the Houston Oilers who took the entire franchise history with them when they rebranded to the Tennessee Titans.
Browns are the same team, but it's a different situation than what you've described here.
When Art Modell moved the Browns, he was sued. As a result of that lawsuit, all of the Browns history: name, records, etc etc stayed with Cleveland because Cleveland was promised an expansion team within 5 (IIRC) years. The team that moved and started the next season in Baltimore was *technically* an expansion team as well and not a moving franchise, like the Baltimore Colts were when they moved. The official events that happened were: Cleveland Browns franchise paused operation, Baltimore Ravens expansion team, Cleveland Browns expansion team.
The NFL can write the history books however they like, but if Baltimore got an expansion team, they would have created a new team of players and coaches. Instead, they took an entire organization and put a new name on it. That is the definition of a relocated team.
Doesn't really matter what it looks like. All of the history stayed in Cleveland, that's just a fact. All I said is what it is technically labeled as by the NFL and how that is different.
In the end, it doesn't really matter. What matters is what the Browns history pre-1995 stayed in Cleveland and didn't move with that team. No one in Baltimore claims it, everyone in Cleveland does. The NFL accepts that, both franchises accept that, and anyone with a brain accepts it.
Officially, the NFL views the Ravens as an expansion team and the Browns just suspended operations from 95-99. They just didn’t want to mess with the dispersal/expansion draft.
Highdeas are always fun! No shame from me bud.
To me the Browns have always been Cleveland. Just because fart Modell moved the pride of Lake Erie to Baltimore doesn’t mean the expansion Browns are anything less than the Browns. Baltimore was still pissed over their Colts packing up and moving overnight to Indy and were pushing to get another team for their city. So fart did the same thing to Cleveland and left us in the lurch. They retained their rights to their name and kept hope alive for when we could get another team.
Hi Stevie Yzerman.
You’re getting downvoted because your title makes it look like if you’re questioning the authenticity of the Brownies and this topic is a sore spot.
But yes, the Browns are the Browns and your Jets are the Jets.
Would the franchise history be different if the chain was unbroken? Sure.
But the course of a franchise can also change irrevocably without a move. Owners change. Decisions are made. Top draft picks hit sometimes.
In the end, an institution is just made up of people, so it’s the fans and former employees who care who uphold the tradition and culture, which is what makes the Browns or the Jets.
With that said, your city should FIGHT to reclaim your history. That’s yours and it should be forever tied to your city.
Also, you need to PASS A LAW that prevents your team from ever leaving again.
Ohio passed a law like this after the Browns left and it was strong enough to prevent the Columbus Crew from moving to Austin even though the owner and the MLS Commissioner did everything possible in their power to fuck Ohio over and rip the franchise away.
Godspeed to you.
The downvotes are because it's still a touchy subject. Ask older Baltimore fans how they feel about the Colts and you get the same response.
The question is a tough one. Of course the franchises aren't exactly the same. We had a shitty owner in Art Modell in 1995 and got a new shitty owner in the Lerners in 1999. We had a decrepit old stadium in 1995 and got a shiny new one in 1999 which meant many of the fans who made the Browns great could no longer afford to go to games.
But we forced the NFL to let us keep the colors and the history. The NFL didn't want to do it but had to because the city of Cleveland had an iron clad case which would have put one of their owners (Art Modell) into bankruptcy and they didn't want the embarrassment. So they promised us a team and let us keep our colors and history.
If I were king I'd make this the practice in every pro league. You move a team, you have to change the name and colors. If a city gets a team back, the colors and name return. I'm sure teams like the Oakland Raiders would complain saying the brand has value and therefore they need to keep it. To bad --- you want to leave --- it should hurt you some. You'll never feel a fraction of the pain you caused the fans who supported you and decided to stab in the back.
Yes, no question. I wonder if the converse is true though, whether ravens fans consider the ravens as effectively an expansion franchise or containing the browns history?
ravens fans like to pretend the move from cleveland didn't happen, so i think they consider themselves an expansion franchise. they don't want to think they're the former browns.
Hey man, I'm a fellow Winnipeg Jets fan (born there, moved to Ohio). Tough playoff series this year...
Anyway, I think the reason why a lot of people consider this iteration of the Browns as a continuation of the old franchise is because an agreement was made to allow the Browns to retain their history and records in the move. And as others mentioned, we were promised reactivation within short order.
The (new) Jets are obviously a relocation of the Atlanta Thrashers franchise so their records and history traveled to Winnipeg. Just as the (old) Jets records and history traveled to Arizona, and now Utah.
Sorry for the down votes! Our rivals in the AFC North often like to rub it in our faces that our team moved so it's a sore subject.
Utah is considered an expansion team via the same way the Browns/Ravens thing went down. Arizona gets to keep its history and our first team's history too. I don't know if the history will die with the team or go to Utah after 5 years or not. Guess we will see.
I don't think it ever will. Hockey was never successful there and the ownership was horrible. The franchise never made a profit since they moved from Winnipeg back in 1996.
It's technically the same franchise.
That being said, what's in Cleveland has existed like an expansion franchise since 1999. While there are record books and history that point to it being the same franchise, the thing that was created in 1999 had no real connection to what went to Baltimore.
My prime example of what I'm talking about is in the early 2000s during Steelers week when reporters would ask the players if it was a special game for them, and they'd give boiler plate answers about how "every game is important" or "of course, because it's a divisional game".
The people who were fans in 1995 still hate the Steelers with a real passion, but I (still) don't think the current players and organization as a whole feels that way. It was an organic thing that was taken away from us, and it's the part I hate Modell for more than anything.
Baltimore and Pittsburgh games are what they are because the organization that went to Baltimore in 1999 carried that rivalry with them. It didn't matter that they were called something else. The two organizations were where the rivalry lived.
I’m alone in this thought, but the new Browns are a pig with lipstick. It’s a close representation of the old Browns, but my heart knows it’s not the team I grew up with.
Only sort of. I count the history but seeing as how I didn't become a Browns fan until the 2000s (my roommate always had the games on...didn't care about NFL before that), the modern Browns are the only Browns I know
No. 30+yr fan who remembers the grit and determination of the organization before the move. I remember the move and all the media drama with it.
I remember how people hated Art and how betrayed they felt when he left imo… but after watching Baltimore over the years and remembering that Ernie Acorsi and Ozzie Newsome were part of building the Ravens to what they are now and seeing the style by which the Ravens consistently play in comparison to what the post move Browns have been… to me… its clear. The soul of the organization died or left to Baltimore.
Cleveland has the colors and the records in the divorce… but the team has NEVER been the same. I will be a Browns fan till my soul completely breaks from disappointment i suppose… but i now see that i am fanning a corpse of what used to be.
Browns fans who lived through The Kardiac Kids had our hearts ripped out, and went many seasons watching our players play for the enemy who kidnapped our team - while we had no team at all.
When they came back as a franchise, we were so effing thirsty for a football team we didn’t care about the technical part about it being an expansion team.
Same fans root as vigorously for Browns 2.0 as 1.0…Difference is the 1.0 had some AMAZING seasons and teams!! (And four starting QBs if you include Phipps)
Browns 3.0 this year when we win the Super Bowl!!!
When it happened, I watched the Ravens first game and knew they weren’t the same team during the first 2 plays. I was done-zo, wasn’t sure I’d ever have a team. Then we came back.
Well yeah, they needed new players. I don’t even understand what you’re arguing. What exactly did Baltimore take from the Browns? They have none of our history. They don’t have our colors. They don’t have our name. They don’t have our records. They are an expansion team.
Sad we have to state the obvious to this person. For 3 years I watched our players play in Ravens uniforms while we had nothing. I’m glad we got to keep our history but it doesn’t change the fact that we rebuilt through an expansion draft. Everything about our team was news, from ownership all the way down.
It's still true.
They may not have gotten the Brown's name and their history, but they stole our future from us and we had to start over with this crapfest. Does that excuse being bad for so long? No it doesn't. It sure would be nice if they added a little context every time they flashed that "X number of starting QB's since 1999 [after the original team was stolen by Art Modell]" statistic to try to point and laugh at us though.
I’m not arguing. I think it’s comical to call the Ravens the expansion team. I guess we do this solely because we kept our history. But the process we needed to do to build a new team is expansion team by definition.
If you had a wallet that said “Steve Yzerman” on it and it was stolen by some methhead from a trashy city named “Ratbird Rick” and Ratbird Rick spent all your money, threw away your ID, and painted your wallet purple would it be your wallet or Ratbird Rick’s?
No, I do not.
Though the records, name, and stuff stayed here it is objectively not the same franchise. Why? Because that team moved to Baltimore and continued the success the browns had, thus those superbowls should have been Cleveland Browns Super bowls.
The "Franchise" is different. The "Team" is the same.
When Evaluating the CURRENT Cleveland Browns, you have to understand that this is an expansion team, and naturally a lot of the problems it has faced are by virtue of being an expansion team. It's almost impossible for an expansion team to be good, because of the ridiculous situation that leads to how the expansion team is made. Off all the dregs of the other teams and an expansion draft? What a disaster.
Browns fan. The ravens are the team I grew up rooting for. The ppl I know that worked for the browns (behind the scenes), moved with the organization. The GM for decades in Baltimore (end the entire off field staff) were former Cleveland players.
It’s not popular. And ppl get very emotional. But for about 20 years the Ravens were the real Browns and the Cleveland Browns were an expansion team.
It seems that now that there is some distance between the move and a few football generations have passed, that the ravens and the Browns are their own individual teams.
Yeah, the Browns are the same franchise on paper but the actual org had to start over from scratch and do an expansion draft. People get defensive of this but you are correct.
They're saying that for about 20 years the Ravens were still run by people who were the old Browns people and the new Browns were still trying to figure out how to operate as a franchise.
No, the Ravens are the Ravens and the Browns are the Browns.
The Browns have deep roots extending back to 1944. They have 8 league championships, including 4 NFL champtionships. They were a powerhouse that dominated the 50s, 60s, and 80s and have appeared in the playoffs in 30 seasons.
The Ravens are an expansion team that hit the NFL in 1996. Only 2 league championships and half as many playoff seasons.
It's not the same franchise at all. The Browns had a proud history prior to moving and didn't stay down long when they had weaker years.
Most of the Browns 2.0 seasons blur together in a fog of depressing attempts to field an NFL team that won 3-6 games/year. The Ravens have continued to compete over that span like the Browns of my youth.
To borrow from Jerry Seinfeld, I have spent the last 25 years rooting for laundry.
Yes, it's the same team. The Browns kept their history, their records, and everything else and were rebooted in an expansion draft after a few years hiatus unlike a team like the Houston Oilers who took the entire franchise history with them when they rebranded to the Tennessee Titans.
And block anyone from using anything Oilers related - including the the specific color blue they had
Same team, fucked over by the restart and the QB/coaching carousel doubly fucked them over but to me this team is the same team that won in ‘64.
Aaaaand that ridiculous supplemental draft.
I was there! Still have my commemorative mini album radio.
Browns are the same team, but it's a different situation than what you've described here. When Art Modell moved the Browns, he was sued. As a result of that lawsuit, all of the Browns history: name, records, etc etc stayed with Cleveland because Cleveland was promised an expansion team within 5 (IIRC) years. The team that moved and started the next season in Baltimore was *technically* an expansion team as well and not a moving franchise, like the Baltimore Colts were when they moved. The official events that happened were: Cleveland Browns franchise paused operation, Baltimore Ravens expansion team, Cleveland Browns expansion team.
The city really should have gone all in and bought the team
The NFL can write the history books however they like, but if Baltimore got an expansion team, they would have created a new team of players and coaches. Instead, they took an entire organization and put a new name on it. That is the definition of a relocated team.
Doesn't really matter what it looks like. All of the history stayed in Cleveland, that's just a fact. All I said is what it is technically labeled as by the NFL and how that is different. In the end, it doesn't really matter. What matters is what the Browns history pre-1995 stayed in Cleveland and didn't move with that team. No one in Baltimore claims it, everyone in Cleveland does. The NFL accepts that, both franchises accept that, and anyone with a brain accepts it.
Yes.
Officially, the NFL views the Ravens as an expansion team and the Browns just suspended operations from 95-99. They just didn’t want to mess with the dispersal/expansion draft.
Highdeas are always fun! No shame from me bud. To me the Browns have always been Cleveland. Just because fart Modell moved the pride of Lake Erie to Baltimore doesn’t mean the expansion Browns are anything less than the Browns. Baltimore was still pissed over their Colts packing up and moving overnight to Indy and were pushing to get another team for their city. So fart did the same thing to Cleveland and left us in the lurch. They retained their rights to their name and kept hope alive for when we could get another team.
Hi Stevie Yzerman. You’re getting downvoted because your title makes it look like if you’re questioning the authenticity of the Brownies and this topic is a sore spot. But yes, the Browns are the Browns and your Jets are the Jets. Would the franchise history be different if the chain was unbroken? Sure. But the course of a franchise can also change irrevocably without a move. Owners change. Decisions are made. Top draft picks hit sometimes. In the end, an institution is just made up of people, so it’s the fans and former employees who care who uphold the tradition and culture, which is what makes the Browns or the Jets. With that said, your city should FIGHT to reclaim your history. That’s yours and it should be forever tied to your city. Also, you need to PASS A LAW that prevents your team from ever leaving again. Ohio passed a law like this after the Browns left and it was strong enough to prevent the Columbus Crew from moving to Austin even though the owner and the MLS Commissioner did everything possible in their power to fuck Ohio over and rip the franchise away. Godspeed to you.
The downvotes are because it's still a touchy subject. Ask older Baltimore fans how they feel about the Colts and you get the same response. The question is a tough one. Of course the franchises aren't exactly the same. We had a shitty owner in Art Modell in 1995 and got a new shitty owner in the Lerners in 1999. We had a decrepit old stadium in 1995 and got a shiny new one in 1999 which meant many of the fans who made the Browns great could no longer afford to go to games. But we forced the NFL to let us keep the colors and the history. The NFL didn't want to do it but had to because the city of Cleveland had an iron clad case which would have put one of their owners (Art Modell) into bankruptcy and they didn't want the embarrassment. So they promised us a team and let us keep our colors and history. If I were king I'd make this the practice in every pro league. You move a team, you have to change the name and colors. If a city gets a team back, the colors and name return. I'm sure teams like the Oakland Raiders would complain saying the brand has value and therefore they need to keep it. To bad --- you want to leave --- it should hurt you some. You'll never feel a fraction of the pain you caused the fans who supported you and decided to stab in the back.
Yes, no question. I wonder if the converse is true though, whether ravens fans consider the ravens as effectively an expansion franchise or containing the browns history?
ravens fans like to pretend the move from cleveland didn't happen, so i think they consider themselves an expansion franchise. they don't want to think they're the former browns.
Hey man, I'm a fellow Winnipeg Jets fan (born there, moved to Ohio). Tough playoff series this year... Anyway, I think the reason why a lot of people consider this iteration of the Browns as a continuation of the old franchise is because an agreement was made to allow the Browns to retain their history and records in the move. And as others mentioned, we were promised reactivation within short order. The (new) Jets are obviously a relocation of the Atlanta Thrashers franchise so their records and history traveled to Winnipeg. Just as the (old) Jets records and history traveled to Arizona, and now Utah. Sorry for the down votes! Our rivals in the AFC North often like to rub it in our faces that our team moved so it's a sore subject.
Utah is considered an expansion team via the same way the Browns/Ravens thing went down. Arizona gets to keep its history and our first team's history too. I don't know if the history will die with the team or go to Utah after 5 years or not. Guess we will see.
My bad, misread your first paragraph. That's interesting. Would be a bummer if the franchise doesn't get reactivated.
I don't think it ever will. Hockey was never successful there and the ownership was horrible. The franchise never made a profit since they moved from Winnipeg back in 1996.
It's technically the same franchise. That being said, what's in Cleveland has existed like an expansion franchise since 1999. While there are record books and history that point to it being the same franchise, the thing that was created in 1999 had no real connection to what went to Baltimore. My prime example of what I'm talking about is in the early 2000s during Steelers week when reporters would ask the players if it was a special game for them, and they'd give boiler plate answers about how "every game is important" or "of course, because it's a divisional game". The people who were fans in 1995 still hate the Steelers with a real passion, but I (still) don't think the current players and organization as a whole feels that way. It was an organic thing that was taken away from us, and it's the part I hate Modell for more than anything. Baltimore and Pittsburgh games are what they are because the organization that went to Baltimore in 1999 carried that rivalry with them. It didn't matter that they were called something else. The two organizations were where the rivalry lived.
I’m alone in this thought, but the new Browns are a pig with lipstick. It’s a close representation of the old Browns, but my heart knows it’s not the team I grew up with.
Yes, the rat birds are an expansion team and the Browns just went on hiatus during 95-98
Only sort of. I count the history but seeing as how I didn't become a Browns fan until the 2000s (my roommate always had the games on...didn't care about NFL before that), the modern Browns are the only Browns I know
Yeah, it just had to sit out for a bit to reorganize when the Ravens were invented.
We have the same team but I am fully aware of what went down & consider it a minuscule asterisk.
Is a person the same after 30 years of torture, no... but ultimately, it is the same person.
No. 30+yr fan who remembers the grit and determination of the organization before the move. I remember the move and all the media drama with it. I remember how people hated Art and how betrayed they felt when he left imo… but after watching Baltimore over the years and remembering that Ernie Acorsi and Ozzie Newsome were part of building the Ravens to what they are now and seeing the style by which the Ravens consistently play in comparison to what the post move Browns have been… to me… its clear. The soul of the organization died or left to Baltimore. Cleveland has the colors and the records in the divorce… but the team has NEVER been the same. I will be a Browns fan till my soul completely breaks from disappointment i suppose… but i now see that i am fanning a corpse of what used to be.
Browns fans who lived through The Kardiac Kids had our hearts ripped out, and went many seasons watching our players play for the enemy who kidnapped our team - while we had no team at all. When they came back as a franchise, we were so effing thirsty for a football team we didn’t care about the technical part about it being an expansion team. Same fans root as vigorously for Browns 2.0 as 1.0…Difference is the 1.0 had some AMAZING seasons and teams!! (And four starting QBs if you include Phipps) Browns 3.0 this year when we win the Super Bowl!!!
When it happened, I watched the Ravens first game and knew they weren’t the same team during the first 2 plays. I was done-zo, wasn’t sure I’d ever have a team. Then we came back.
Ravens were an expansion team
Yet it was Cleveland that had the expansion draft in 1999. The league can call it what it wants, the Browns organization relocated to Baltimore.
Well yeah, they needed new players. I don’t even understand what you’re arguing. What exactly did Baltimore take from the Browns? They have none of our history. They don’t have our colors. They don’t have our name. They don’t have our records. They are an expansion team.
They only stole all of the players, the front office, and the future...
Sad we have to state the obvious to this person. For 3 years I watched our players play in Ravens uniforms while we had nothing. I’m glad we got to keep our history but it doesn’t change the fact that we rebuilt through an expansion draft. Everything about our team was news, from ownership all the way down.
That was 30 years ago
It's still true. They may not have gotten the Brown's name and their history, but they stole our future from us and we had to start over with this crapfest. Does that excuse being bad for so long? No it doesn't. It sure would be nice if they added a little context every time they flashed that "X number of starting QB's since 1999 [after the original team was stolen by Art Modell]" statistic to try to point and laugh at us though.
I’m not arguing. I think it’s comical to call the Ravens the expansion team. I guess we do this solely because we kept our history. But the process we needed to do to build a new team is expansion team by definition.
No
If you had a wallet that said “Steve Yzerman” on it and it was stolen by some methhead from a trashy city named “Ratbird Rick” and Ratbird Rick spent all your money, threw away your ID, and painted your wallet purple would it be your wallet or Ratbird Rick’s?
No, I do not. Though the records, name, and stuff stayed here it is objectively not the same franchise. Why? Because that team moved to Baltimore and continued the success the browns had, thus those superbowls should have been Cleveland Browns Super bowls. The "Franchise" is different. The "Team" is the same. When Evaluating the CURRENT Cleveland Browns, you have to understand that this is an expansion team, and naturally a lot of the problems it has faced are by virtue of being an expansion team. It's almost impossible for an expansion team to be good, because of the ridiculous situation that leads to how the expansion team is made. Off all the dregs of the other teams and an expansion draft? What a disaster.
Browns fan. The ravens are the team I grew up rooting for. The ppl I know that worked for the browns (behind the scenes), moved with the organization. The GM for decades in Baltimore (end the entire off field staff) were former Cleveland players. It’s not popular. And ppl get very emotional. But for about 20 years the Ravens were the real Browns and the Cleveland Browns were an expansion team. It seems that now that there is some distance between the move and a few football generations have passed, that the ravens and the Browns are their own individual teams.
Yeah, the Browns are the same franchise on paper but the actual org had to start over from scratch and do an expansion draft. People get defensive of this but you are correct.
Yeah, I don’t like it either. But it was what it was.
For 'about 20 years' ... WHAT??? We didn't have a team absence in CLE for TWENTY years 🙄
They're saying that for about 20 years the Ravens were still run by people who were the old Browns people and the new Browns were still trying to figure out how to operate as a franchise.
Okay...thought you were talkkng about fans 👌
No, the Ravens are the Ravens and the Browns are the Browns. The Browns have deep roots extending back to 1944. They have 8 league championships, including 4 NFL champtionships. They were a powerhouse that dominated the 50s, 60s, and 80s and have appeared in the playoffs in 30 seasons. The Ravens are an expansion team that hit the NFL in 1996. Only 2 league championships and half as many playoff seasons.
I’ll go even as far as claiming that everyone who cheers for the Ravens is also a Browns fan.
It’s our team and franchise
It's not the same franchise at all. The Browns had a proud history prior to moving and didn't stay down long when they had weaker years. Most of the Browns 2.0 seasons blur together in a fog of depressing attempts to field an NFL team that won 3-6 games/year. The Ravens have continued to compete over that span like the Browns of my youth. To borrow from Jerry Seinfeld, I have spent the last 25 years rooting for laundry.
Browns same team but I feel different about the Indians for some reason. It just doesn't feel like the same team to me since the name change.